screener_rsi_oversold

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral transparency burden. It accurately conveys a non-mutating filtering operation ('Find') and the threshold direction, but it does not disclose the output format, result ordering, data source, or whether results are based on current market data. For a simple read-only screener this is minimally adequate but not rich.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that uses precise language without filler. It communicates the essential purpose immediately and is appropriately sized for a straightforward screener tool.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool is simple and the input schema is rich, but there is no output schema and the description does not describe the shape of the returned results, result ordering, or default limit behavior. These gaps are partially mitigated by the well-documented parameters and the clear screening intent, making it adequate but not fully complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema fully documents all five parameters (limit, maxRsi, exchange, timeframe, quoteAsset) with descriptions and defaults, giving 100% schema coverage. The description adds high-level meaning like 'below a threshold' and 'potentially oversold,' but it does not add parameter-level details beyond what the schema already provides.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses the specific verb 'Find' and clearly identifies the resource ('cryptocurrencies') and the criterion ('RSI below a threshold'). It distinguishes the tool from the sibling `screener_rsi_overbought` by direction, and 'potentially oversold' reinforces the intended screening intent.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides a clear context for when to use this tool: when screening for oversold conditions using RSI. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or point to alternative screeners such as `screener_rsi_overbought`, `screener_top_gainers`, or `screener_volume_surge`.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.